djackson

17 ms·

1.
by djackson 15y ago
The economic consequences of non-compete agreements are interesting, to say the least. I'm curious to see what happens to average salaries for programmers over the next few years if this investigation results in more competition. I'd also
2.
by djackson 15y ago
At least one of those activities is blacking out his website on SOPA blackout day.
3.
by djackson 15y ago
I think the point is a bit clearer if you imagine each song having its own market. I am not a member of the market for dubstep. I am a cheapskate in the market for Taylor Swift songs - I'd never pay full price, but I could be tempted if the
4.
by djackson 15y ago
> and a greater challenge for SSDs trying to catch up with the amount of storage on offer. This technology is pretty much exclusively for backups, no? Not really the competitive space for SSDs. With only a single read/write head and 18T
5.
by djackson 15y ago
> Or before they sell it all to markters They do this now...
6.
by djackson 15y ago
*irreplaceable
7.
by djackson 15y ago
succinct
8.
by djackson 15y ago
It's not about what they eat, it's about what it becomes in the digestive system.
9.
by djackson 15y ago
One of his supporting arguments cuts both ways. Apple's patent on "hand scaling velocity" simply gives a mathematical formula for the sentence: "scale at a speed proportional to how fast the fingers are moving." There is nothing groundbreak
10.
by djackson 15y ago
He's just removing the right-most letter/number swap in each iteration.
11.
by djackson 15y ago
Don't you end up eating the digestive system of the bug along with the rest of it? The sticking point for me is not that the animal is a bug, but that I am eating its waste. Never having eaten bugs, I'm not sure how exactly this works out
12.
by djackson 15y ago
The screenshot looks remarkably similar to the Google wave layout.
13.
by djackson 15y ago
Will be interesting to see how many people take advantage of this.
14.
by djackson 15y ago
If you killed someone, I want them to win the case against you.
15.
by djackson 15y ago
They have the information. They have your hard drive. You have a key, or they can brute force the information out with decryption software. This is not a Fifth Amendment case. They don't want or care about the password itself. They can't
16.
by djackson 15y ago
This case is not about rights, it's about a specific entity, the Department of Justice of the United States of America, having a specific investigative power, namely, that they don't have to keep a horde of expensive consultants on retainer
17.
by djackson 15y ago
I don't think that in the case that someone has your laptop in hand you can still plead the fifth. If there is evidence pertinent to the case on the physical drive obtained by the government, then they already are in possession of the co
18.
by djackson 15y ago
I don't think you understand what a subpoena is. A subpoena is a compulsory order to produce all documents related to a matter, whether the government knows they exist or not. So yes, if you believe in subpoena power, you agree that you sh
19.
by djackson 15y ago
Nobody has the right to avoid a reasonable search in the United States. You are protected by the fourth amendment from unreasonable searches, but you aren't going to convince me that a detective has no right, with a warrant in hand, to sea
20.
by djackson 15y ago
Do you think the government should have subpoena power in order to collect evidence? Do you think they should be able to search a murderer's home for the weapon? I'm not saying they should have this power without a warrant, but nobody has
21.
by djackson 15y ago
Yeah... no. There's a line, and past that line, law enforcement has no power to enforce laws at all. Removing the DOJ's ability to collect evidence is, in some cases, the equivalent to denying a detective access to a crime scene. If all p
22.
by djackson 15y ago
It's easy to see why you wouldn't want someone to decrypt your laptop. What about Bernie Madoff? Wouldn't you be furious if all data produced by a corrupt hedge fund manager was encrypted? Wouldn't you want the DOJ to be able to hold them
23.
by djackson 15y ago
From the same page: "Other than the limited license set forth in Section 11, Google acknowledges and agrees that it obtains no right, title or interest from you (or your licensors) under these Terms in or to any Content that you submit, pos
24.
by djackson 15y ago
Wouldn't you do the same thing?
25.
by djackson 15y ago
Why would he need to explain it to the windows that are using his coworkers? Also, it's very unclear to me what that the situation you are describing entails. /s Grammatically, your sentence is no less ambiguous.
26.
by djackson 15y ago
yawn It's been done. http://textaligncentaur.com/
27.
by djackson 15y ago
Yeah.. that was pretty much what I was going for, there.
28.
by djackson 15y ago
1. Person A has a laptop 2. Person A no longer has a laptop. Person A did not sell or give away this laptop. The laptop was stolen. 3. Person B now has the missing laptop. Conclusion: Person B is in possession of a stolen laptop.
29.
by djackson 15y ago
Actually, a lot of phones have NFC technology in them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_field_communication#NFC-en...
30.
by djackson 15y ago
Well, since the TSA aren't law enforcement, they can't legally detain anyone - they rely on the police (local / state) for enforcement. Technically, Texas could have their officers refuse to detain those the TSA refused to clear. At that p

More ›